Court File and Parties
COURT FILE NO.: CV 1700580073 DATE: 20241010
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
SUSAN AMON Plaintiff – and – MEJJ ENTERPRISES INC, and WEST REALTY GROUP LTD. cob ROYAL LEPAGE WEST REALTY GROUP Defendants
Counsel: Ryan Breedon, for the Plaintiff Karen McArthur, interim lawyer for MEJJ and Mr. Roopchand.
HEARD: October 9, 2024
Papageorgiou J.
Overview
[1] The plaintiff obtained summary judgment on August 22, 2018, against the defendant MEJJ Enterprises Inc. in respect of its claim for breach of a real estate agreement where MEJJ agreed to purchase the plaintiff’s property. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on March 6, 2019.
[2] Mr. Mohan Roopchand, the sole director and officer of MEJJ attended a judgment debtor examination on August 22, 2019, during which he gave several undertakings on behalf of MEJJ pertaining to MEJJ’s financial status, liabilities, properties, and other information.
[3] The undertakings were not answered.
[4] On February 6, 2020, McGraw, A.J. ordered that MEJJ was to answer undertakings given at the judgment debtor examination by February 14, 2020, together with $1,000 in costs.
[5] MEJJ failed to answer the undertakings in accordance with McGraw A.J.’s order.
[6] The plaintiff commenced a contempt motion against MEJJ. The plaintiff also sought a contempt order as against Mr. Roopchand on the basis of Telus Mobility v. Telecommunications Workers Union, 2002 FCT 656 which held that where a company is found in contempt, aiding and abetting directors may also be found in contempt.
[7] On May 2, 2023, at a case conference, counsel, Mr. Morris, attended on behalf of MEJJ and assured Chalmers J. that MEJJ would satisfy undertakings within one month.
[8] Chalmers J. did not schedule the contempt motion but ordered that MEJJ answer undertakings within one month failing which the contempt motion could be brought.
[9] On July 24, 2024, the parties appeared before me. At that time, MEJJ had a new counsel who attended and advised that MEJJ was working on the undertakings and would be satisfied shortly. The motion was adjourned on consent to permit this.
[10] The parties then attended before me on October 9, 2024, at 2:00. Undertakings had still not been fully complied with but MEJJ’s counsel indicated that they were almost complete and that she had sent a raft of undertakings to the plaintiff shortly before 2:00 pm. Counsel for the plaintiff had not had time to review the undertakings but took the position that I should still make a contempt order because MEJJ had acted in contempt of the court through all of the significant delays.
[11] MEJJ and Mr. Roopchand argued that I should adjourn the motion.
Decision
[12] For the reasons that follow, I declare that MEJJ is in breach of McGraw A.J. and Chalmers J.’s Orders.
[13] I am directing that it comply with these orders by November 1, 2024, failing which the contempt motion will proceed on November 18, 2024, at 10:00 a.m.
Analysis
[14] It was not appropriate to adjourn the motion. MEJJ had flouted two court orders for a considerable length of time.
[15] As O’Leary J explained in Canada Metal Co. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (No. 2):
To allow court orders to be disobeyed would be to treat the road towards anarchy. If orders of the Court can be treated with disrespect, the whole administration of justice is brought into scorn. Daily, thousands of Canadians resort to our Courts for relief against the wrongful acts of others. If the remedies that the Courts grant to correct those wrongs can be ignored, then there will be nothing left but for each person to take the law into his own hands. Loss of respect for the Courts will quickly result in the destruction of our society.
Canada Metal Co. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (1974), 4 OR (2d) 585 at para. 70, affirmed,
[16] However, I am not persuaded that at this stage it is appropriate to make an Order of contempt, particularly since MEJJ has made significant efforts and delivered most of the undertakings.
[17] The exercise of the contempt power is discretionary and Courts discourage the routine use of this power to obtain compliance with court orders. The power should be exercised cautiously and with great restraint as an enforcement tool of last, rather than first, resort: Ruffolo v. David, 2019 ONCA 385.
[18] Before making a contempt finding, a judge should consider other options, such as issuing a declaration that the party breached the order: Carey, at paras. 36-37; Chong v. Donnelly, 2019 ONCA 799, 33 R.F.L. (8th) 19, at paras. 9-12; Valoris pour enfants et adultes de Prescott-Russell c. K.R., 2021 ONCA 366, at para. 41; and Ruffolo, supra, at paras. 18-19.
[19] In this case, I am giving MEJJ one last chance to put itself into compliance, which shall be done by November 1, 2024.
[20] The contempt motion shall return before me on November 18, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. in the event there are still issues with noncompliance.
[21] MEJJ and Mr. Roopchand shall pay costs to the plaintiff fixed in the amount of $4,000 payable within 14 days.
Papageorgiou J.
Released: October 10, 2024
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN: SUSAN AMON Plaintiff – and – MEJJ ENTERPRISES INC, and WEST REALTY GROUP LTD. cob ROYAL LEPAGE WEST REALTY GROUP Defendants
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Papageorgiou J.
Released: October 10, 2024